Smehlik v. Athletes and Artists, Inc.
United States District Court for the Western District of New York
861 F. Supp. 1162 (1994)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Richard Smehlik (plaintiff), a Czechoslovakian hockey player, met with Carl Hron, a sports agent with Athletes and Artists, Inc. (A&A) (defendant) to discuss a possible relationship agreement. Hron told Smehlik that A&A could obtain a professional hockey contract with the Buffalo Sabres or another National Hockey League (NHL) team “right away.” Smehlik signed an agreement allowing A&A to act as Smehlik’s representative in negotiating an NHL contract. A&A agreed to use its “best efforts” to secure a hockey contract on Smehlik’s behalf. Approximately two years later, A&A had not obtained a hockey contract for Smehlik. Smehlik terminated his agreement with A&A and retained a different agent, who quickly arranged for Smehlik to play for the Buffalo Sabres. Smehlik sued A&A in federal district court, alleging common-law fraudulent misrepresentation. Smehlik alleged that A&A, through Hron, misrepresented the agency’s abilities and capabilities in securing an NHL contract for Smehlik. Additionally, Smehlik asserted that he reasonably relied on Hron’s representations in signing the agreement with A&A. A&A moved to dismiss Smehlik’s complaint. Specifically, A&A argued that the complaint impermissibly attempted to convert a breach-of-contract claim into an action for fraud.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Curtin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.